pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00659 · v1 · pith:GJSFBAJGnew · submitted 2026-07-01 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.IM· physics.ao-ph· physics.plasm-ph

Unveiling the Mysteries of Lightning: Exploring its fundamental Physical Processes with SKA-LOW

Brian M Hare , Sjoerd Bouma , Stijn Buitink , Arthur Corstanje , Steve Cummer , Joseph Dwyer , Vital De Henau , Tim Huege
show 10 more authors
Philipp Laub Ningyu Liu Marten A.A. Lourens Katie Mulrey Anna Nelles Olaf Scholten Chris Sterpka Karen Terveer Paulina \v{T}urekov\'a Keito Watanabe
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 05:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.IMphysics.ao-phphysics.plasm-ph
keywords lightningSKA-LOWradio interferometryplasma physicsVHF emissionslightning initiationatmospheric electricitylightning propagation
0
0 comments X

The pith

SKA-LOW will use radio observations to explore how lightning initiates and propagates.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes that the SKA-LOW telescope can address gaps in understanding lightning by capturing its radio emissions across wide frequencies and at high sensitivity. It notes that processes like initiation and propagation happen too quickly and behind clouds for most instruments, but SKA-LOW's bandwidth will test VHF emission mechanisms while its resolution and sensitivity reach faint early signals. This builds directly on prior interferometer results and focuses on plasma behavior in lightning. The approach matters because it targets the basic physics that current observations miss.

Core claim

SKA-LOW's unrivaled spectral bandwidth and sensitivity, combined with high resolution from large baselines, will allow detailed study of lightning's fundamental plasma physics processes such as initiation, propagation, connection to ground, and emission of high-energy radiation by observing radio signals including the very first emissions from a flash.

What carries the argument

SKA-LOW's spectral bandwidth, sensitivity, and resolution from large antenna baselines, which together enable mapping of VHF radiation and detection of faint lightning signals.

If this is right

  • Direct tests of how lightning plasma emits VHF radiation across a broad frequency range.
  • Detection of the initial radio emissions that mark the start of a lightning flash.
  • New constraints on the plasma conditions during propagation and ground connection.
  • Links between radio data and high-energy radiation events produced by the same processes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the observations succeed they could be combined with ground-based electric field or optical sensors to cross-check plasma models.
  • The same instrument setup might be applied to other transient atmospheric radio sources beyond lightning.
  • Results could inform whether dedicated SKA time for atmospheric studies becomes a standard use case.

Load-bearing premise

Lightning produces radio emissions in SKA-LOW's frequency bands at levels detectable even for its faintest processes.

What would settle it

A set of SKA-LOW observations of active lightning that detects no radio signals in the target bands or fails to resolve propagation details at the claimed scales would show the instrument cannot deliver the proposed insights.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00659 by Anna Nelles, Arthur Corstanje, Brian M Hare, Chris Sterpka, Joseph Dwyer, Karen Terveer, Katie Mulrey, Keito Watanabe, Marten A.A. Lourens, Ningyu Liu, Olaf Scholten, Paulina \v{T}urekov\'a, Philipp Laub, Sjoerd Bouma, Steve Cummer, Stijn Buitink, Tim Huege, Vital De Henau.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Some basic lightning processes. Starting with a) the distribution of electrical charge in a thunderstorm, followed by b) initiation, c-e) propagation of the leaders, f) connection to ground, and g-h) return stroke. Inspired by figure 1.3 in Dwyer and Uman (2014). few streamers at a time. Thus, multi-scale modeling of lightning growth including the very large number of streamers present at a leader tip is c… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A small lightning flash observed by LOFAR. Each dot is the 3D location and time of a located source of VHF emission during the lightning flash, projected onto different Euclidean planes. Color indicates time in order to help compare the different panels. single current pulse along the leader core) (Hare et al., 2020). Furthermore, VHF emission has been detected from an upward jet (a type of upward lightnin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Frequency vs time plots of three VHF emission models: exponential streamer growth, streamer collision, and stochastic photo-ionization. Time is from start of the simulation. In panel "streamer collision", the two streamers collide at 14 ns. The frequency band of SKA-LOW and LOFAR-LBA is indicated. Color indicates power of the continuous wavelet transform on an arbitrary scale. Figure modified from (Malla e… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Global distribution of lightning based on WWLN (world wide lightning network) data. Figure modified from (Kaplan and Lau, 2022) figure 2. Color scale is logrithmic. 3 SKA-LOW Lightning Observation and Imaging Strategy and Technical Requirements Lightning observations with SKA-LOW share many similarities with cosmic ray observations (Mulrey et al., 2026). Since lightning occurs in SKA-LOW’s near field, and … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Lightning is a surprisingly poorly understood phenomena. It consists of a wide variety of complex processes such as initiation, propagation, connection to ground, even emission of high-energy radiation. However, due to the extreme challenges in observing lightning at fast time scales, small spatial scales, and behind obscuring clouds, these processes are not well understood. In the past, interferometers such as the LOFAR radio telescope have provided unique insight and discoveries into the physics of lightning. The new SKA-LOW being built in western Australia will provide unrivaled spectral bandwidth and sensitivity, which will be combined with high resolution resulting from large antenna baselines. We will use SKA-LOW to observe lightning in order to explore its fundamental plasma physics, such as how it initiates and propagates. SKA's high bandwidth will allow us to test how lightning emits VHF radiation, giving tremendous insight into precisely how the plasma behaves. SKA's sensitivity will allow us to explore extremely faint lightning processes, such as the very first radio emission from a lightning flash. Here, we detail the lightning physics that can be explored with SKA, as well as the observation strategy needed explore such physics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a forward-looking science case proposing the use of the completed SKA-LOW array (50–350 MHz) to observe lightning radio emission. It argues that the instrument’s wide bandwidth, sensitivity, and long baselines will enable new constraints on plasma processes including initiation, propagation, and faint early-stage emission, building on prior LOFAR results.

Significance. If the detectability premise holds, the proposed observations could deliver broadband, high-resolution data on processes that are currently inaccessible, extending LOFAR’s demonstrated capabilities and addressing open questions in lightning plasma physics. The strength of the case rests on the instrument’s technical specifications rather than new derivations or data.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract and § on observation strategy: the claim that SKA-LOW sensitivity will reach “extremely faint lightning processes” and “the very first radio emission” is not supported by any quantitative estimate of expected flux density, source distance, or comparison to the array’s system equivalent flux density; without such numbers the central feasibility assertion remains untested within the manuscript.
  2. Section detailing VHF emission tests: the statement that high bandwidth “will allow us to test how lightning emits VHF radiation” does not specify which spectral features or polarization signatures are predicted to be diagnostic, nor how they differ from existing LOFAR constraints in the overlapping band.
minor comments (2)
  1. Abstract: “phenomena” should be “phenomenon”; “needed explore such physics” is missing “to”.
  2. The manuscript would benefit from explicit citation of the LOFAR lightning papers whose results are invoked as the foundation for the SKA-LOW case.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight areas where the manuscript can be strengthened with additional quantitative support and specificity. We address each major comment below and will revise the paper accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract and § on observation strategy: the claim that SKA-LOW sensitivity will reach “extremely faint lightning processes” and “the very first radio emission” is not supported by any quantitative estimate of expected flux density, source distance, or comparison to the array’s system equivalent flux density; without such numbers the central feasibility assertion remains untested within the manuscript.

    Authors: We agree that the current manuscript does not include the requested quantitative estimates. In the revised version we will add calculations of expected flux densities for early-stage and faint lightning emission, scaled from published LOFAR measurements, together with representative source distances for events observable from the SKA site and direct comparisons to the SKA-LOW SEFD across the 50–350 MHz band. These additions will place the feasibility claims on a firmer numerical footing. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Section detailing VHF emission tests: the statement that high bandwidth “will allow us to test how lightning emits VHF radiation” does not specify which spectral features or polarization signatures are predicted to be diagnostic, nor how they differ from existing LOFAR constraints in the overlapping band.

    Authors: We accept that greater detail is required. The revised manuscript will explicitly identify the diagnostic observables—such as the frequency-dependent spectral index of streamer emission, the presence or absence of narrowband features, and the degree of linear polarization—that SKA-LOW’s continuous 50–350 MHz coverage can measure. We will also clarify how these measurements extend LOFAR results by providing uninterrupted spectral coverage above 80 MHz and improved sensitivity, enabling tests of emission models that are currently limited by LOFAR’s narrower instantaneous bandwidth. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in this observational proposal

full rationale

This is a forward-looking observational proposal paper with no derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or predictions that could reduce to inputs by construction. The central premise—that SKA-LOW's capabilities will enable new insights into lightning plasma physics—rests on prior external LOFAR results in overlapping bands and on the instrument's stated specifications, neither of which is internally derived or self-referential. No self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked as load-bearing steps. The manuscript is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks with a circularity score of 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no mathematical model, free parameters, axioms, or new physical entities; it is a descriptive proposal for instrument use.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5828 in / 1031 out tokens · 23748 ms · 2026-07-02T05:46:09.566750+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abl8731. O. Chanrion et al.Geophysical Research Letters, 44(1):496–503,

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abl8731

  2. [2]

    doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2013.09.004

    ISSN 0370-1573. doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2013.09.004. The Physics of Lightning. H. E. Edens, K. B. Eack, W. Rison, and S. J. Hunyady.Geophysical Research Letters, 41(4): 1336–1342,

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2013.09.004 2013

  3. [3]

    doi: 10.1002/2013GL059180. B. M. Hare et al.Phys. Rev. Lett., 124:105101, Mar

    work page doi:10.1002/2013gl059180

  4. [4]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.105101. B. M. Hare et al.Nature, 568:360–363,

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.105101

  5. [5]

    doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1086-6. J. D. Hill, M. A. Uman, and D. M. Jordan.Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 116 (D16),

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1086-6

  6. [6]

    J.O.KaplanandK.H.-K.Lau.EarthSystemScienceData,14(12):5665–5670,2022

    doi: 10.1029/2011JD015818. J.O.KaplanandK.H.-K.Lau.EarthSystemScienceData,14(12):5665–5670,2022. doi: 10.5194/ essd-14-5665-2022. URLhttps://essd.copernicus.org/articles/14/5665/2022/. X. Kong, X. Qie, and Y. Zhao.Geophysical Research Letters, 35(5),

    work page doi:10.1029/2011jd015818 2022

  7. [7]

    1029/2007GL032764

    doi: https://doi.org/10. 1029/2007GL032764. N.Liuetal.JournalofGeophysicalResearch: Atmospheres,124(17-18):10134–10153,2019. doi: 10.1029/2019JD030439. N. Y. Liu and J. R. Dwyer.Geophysical Research Letters, 47(23):e2020GL090325,

    work page doi:10.1029/2019jd030439 2019

  8. [8]

    e2020GL090325 10.1029/2020GL090325

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090325. e2020GL090325 10.1029/2020GL090325. H. Malla et al. Calculating radio emissions of positive streamer phenomena using 3d simulations,

    work page doi:10.1029/2020gl090325

  9. [9]

    doi: 10.1088/1361-6595/abaa05. Y. Pu and S. A. Cummer.Geophysical Research Letters, 51(1):e2023GL107388,

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6595/abaa05

  10. [10]

    e2023GL107388 2023GL107388

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023GL107388. e2023GL107388 2023GL107388. Y. Pu, S. A. Cummer, and N. Liu.Geophysical Research Letters, 48(11):e2021GL093145,

    work page doi:10.1029/2023gl107388

  11. [11]

    e2021GL093145

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL093145. e2021GL093145. Y. Pu, N. Liu, and S. A. Cummer.Geophysical Research Letters, 49(5):e2021GL097374,

    work page doi:10.1029/2021gl093145

  12. [12]

    e2021GL097374 2021GL097374

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL097374. e2021GL097374 2021GL097374. W. Rison et al.Nature Communications, 7(1):10721,

    work page doi:10.1029/2021gl097374

  13. [13]

    URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10721

    doi: 10.1038/ncomms10721. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10721. M. M. F. Saba, D. R. R. da Silva, J. G. Pantuso, and C. L. da Silva.Geophysical Research Letters, 49(24):e2022GL101482,

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms10721

  14. [14]

    e2022GL101482

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL101482. e2022GL101482. O. Scholten et al.Atmospheric Research, 260:105688, 2021a. ISSN 0169-8095. doi: https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2021.105688. O.Scholtenetal.JournalofGeophysicalResearch: Atmospheres,126(4):e2020JD033126,2021b. doi: https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033126. O. Scholten et al.Phys. Rev. D, 105:062007, Mar

    work page doi:10.1029/2022gl101482 2021

  15. [15]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.062007. O. Scholten et al.Geophysical Research Letters, 50(8):e2022GL101304, 2023a. doi: https: //doi.org/10.1029/2022GL101304. O. Scholten et al.Scientific Reports, 13(1):14485, Sep 2023b. ISSN 2045-2322. doi: 10.1038/ s41598-023-41218-x. F. Shi, N. Liu, J. R. Dwyer, and K. M. A. Ihaddadene.Geophysical Research Letters, 46(1): 443–451,

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.062007 2045

  16. [16]

    doi: 10.1029/2018GL080309. C. Sterpka et al.Geophysical Research Letters, 48(23):e2021GL095511,

    work page doi:10.1029/2018gl080309

  17. [17]

    org/10.1029/2021GL095511

    doi: https://doi. org/10.1029/2021GL095511. M. Stock et al.Remote Sensing, 15(14),

    work page doi:10.1029/2021gl095511

  18. [18]

    doi: 10.3390/rs15143657. M. G. Stock et al.Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 119(6):3134–3165,

    work page doi:10.3390/rs15143657

  19. [19]

    doi: 10.1002/2013JD020217. M. Stolzenburg et al.Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118(7):2918–2937,

    work page doi:10.1002/2013jd020217

  20. [20]

    doi: 10.1002/jgrd.50276. J. N. Tilles et al.Nature Communications, 10(1):1648,

    work page doi:10.1002/jgrd.50276

  21. [21]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09621-z

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09621-z. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09621-z. T. N. G. Trinh et al.Geophysical Research Letters, 52(8):e2025GL115586,

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09621-z

  22. [22]

    e2025GL115586 2025GL115586

    doi: https: //doi.org/10.1029/2025GL115586. e2025GL115586 2025GL115586. M. P. van Haarlem et al.aap, 556:A2, Aug

    work page doi:10.1029/2025gl115586

  23. [23]

    doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201220873. 12

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220873